From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tang Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] kvm, mem-hotplug: Update apic access page when it is migrated. Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2014 14:17:25 +0800 Message-ID: <53BA3B75.3090801@cn.fujitsu.com> References: <1404291637-15048-1-git-send-email-tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com> <1404291637-15048-5-git-send-email-tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com> <20140703135507.GM18167@minantech.com> <53B60EF1.6030307@cn.fujitsu.com> <20140704101310.GE4399@minantech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: , , , , , , Tang Chen To: Gleb Natapov Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20140704101310.GE4399@minantech.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Hi Gleb, Thanks for all the advices. Please see below. On 07/04/2014 06:13 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: ...... >>>> +static void vmx_set_apic_access_page_addr(struct kvm *kvm, hpa_t hpa) >>>> +{ >>>> + if (vm_need_virtualize_apic_accesses(kvm)) >>> This shouldn't even been called if apic access page is not supported. Nor >>> mmu_notifier path neither tdp_page_fault path should ever see 0xfee00000 >>> address. BUG() is more appropriate here. >>> >> >> I don't quite understand. Why calling this function here will leed to bug ? >> (Sorry, I'm not quite understand the internal of KVM. Please help.) > I didn't say that calling this function here will lead to a bug. I am saying that > if vm_need_virtualize_apic_accesses() is false this function should not be called > at all, so this check is redundant. > Do you mean when vm_need_virtualize_apic_accesses() is false, it should not be called ? It has to be true ? ...... >>>> + if (kvm->arch.apic_access_page_migrated) { >>>> + if (kvm->arch.apic_access_page) >>>> + kvm->arch.apic_access_page = pfn_to_page(0); >>> All vcpus will access apic_access_page without locking here. May be >>> set kvm->arch.apic_access_page to zero in mmu_notifier and here call >>> kvm_x86_ops->set_apic_access_page_addr(kvm, kvm->arch.apic_access_page); >>> >> >> I'm a little confused. apic access page's phys_addr is stored in vmcs, and >> I think it will be used by vcpu directly to access the physical page. >> Setting kvm->arch.apic_access_page to zero will not stop it, right ? >> > Right, kvm->arch.apic_access_page is just a shadow value for whatever is written > in vmcs. After setting it all vcpus need to update their vmcs values. > >> I'm wondering what happens when apic page is migrated, but the vmcs is still >> holding its old phys_addr before the vcpu request is handled. >> > apic page should not be migrated untill all vpus are forced out of a guest mode and > instructed to reload new value on a next guest entry. That's what we are trying to > achieve here. > So, setting VMCS APIC_ACCESS_ADDR pointer to zero will not stop vcpu to access apic access page, right ? If so, all the vcpus have to stop till apic page finishes its migration, and new value is set in each vcpu, which means we should stop guest, right ? Thanks.